INTERACTIONS AMONG INSIDER OWNERSHIP, DIVIDEND POLICY, DEBT POLICY, INVESTMENT DECISION, AND BUSINESS RISK | F. | Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business 6232 66469 1 PB

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business
Volume 28, Number 1, 2013, 132 – 148

INTERACTIONS AMONG INSIDER OWNERSHIP,
DIVIDEND POLICY, DEBT POLICY, INVESTMENT DECISION,
AND BUSINESS RISK
Indri Erkaningrum F.
ASMI Santa Maria Yogyakarta
(indri_erkaningrum@yahoo.co.id)

ABSTRACT
The study of interaction among insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business risk is still conducted. This research aims at investigating the
influencing factors of insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision,
business risk, and the interaction among insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy,
investment decision, and business risk. The samples of the research are 137 manufacturing
companies listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange from the year 2006 to 2010. The three
stages least square simultaneous equation model is used to analyze the interaction among
insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business risk. The
analysis result of insider ownership equation shows that investment, business risk, and size
have negative influence on insider ownership. Insider ownership, debt and business risk
give negative impact to dividend that is shown on equation of dividend. Negative impact of

dividend, business risk, and profitability to debt is shown on equation of debt. The analysis
result of investment equation shows that insider ownership and business risk have negative
influence on investment, whereas profitability and sales growth have positive influence on
investment. The analysis result of business risk equation shows that insider ownership,
dividend, investment, and size have negative influence on business risk, whereas variability
of earnings has positive influence on business risk. The analysis result of the interaction
among insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business
risk shows that: 1) there are reciprocal interactions among insider ownership, investment,
and business risk; 2) there are reciprocal interactions between dividend and debt; 3) there
are reciprocal interactions between dividend and business risk; 4) insider ownership influences dividend; 5) business risk influences debt. The empirical evidence of interaction
among insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business
risk helps the companies to make financial policy minimize agency problem.
Keywords: insider ownership, dividend, debt, investment, business risk
INTRODUCTION
Conflict of interest and asymmetric information results in agency problem that can
arise among shareholders, managers, and
creditors. Financial policy is prone to be made
by managers to maximize prosperity of their

own and not of the shareholders. The disparity

of income earned is to be the cause of the rise
of conflict among the shareholders and creditors. Asymmetric information results in the
use of the policy made by managers for
detecting the company’s prospect. Insider
ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, and

2013

Erkaningrum

investment decision can be used for agency
problem minimization. Financial policies are
made in order to make business risk more
controllable.
This research is conducted to analyze interactions among insider ownership, dividend
policy, debt policy, investment decision, and
business risk. So far, some research has been
conducted to observe interactions among several variables, while research that observes
interactions among insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment policy,
and business risk has not been carried out yet.

This interaction is interesting to study more
thoroughly through empirical analysis in this
research. Jensen, et al., 1992) observed the
interaction among insider ownership, debt, and
dividend. Adedeji (1998) observed the interaction among dividend, debt, and investment.
Chen et al. (1999) observed the interaction
among managerial ownership, risk taking, debt
policy, and dividend policy. Wibowo &
Erkaningrum (2002) observed interaction
among dividend, debt, and investment in
Indonesia.
The major objectives that this research is
expected to achieve is to examine empirically:
1) influencing factors towards insider ownership; 2) influencing factors towards dividend
policy; 3) influencing factors towards debt
policy; 4) influencing factors towards investment decision; 5) influencing factors towards
business risk; and 6) interaction among insider
ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business risk.
LITERATURE OVERVIEW
The interaction among insider ownership,

dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision, and business risk can be explained by
agency theory and signaling theory. The different interests among the shareholders, managers, and creditor are to create inter-group
conflict, which is called agency problem. Papadopoulos and Charalambidis (2007) stated
that agency problem is interest conflict that

133

can arise: 1) between the shareholders and
managers, and; 2) between the shareholders
and creditor. The interest conflict between the
shareholders and managers arises because the
policy that the managers made is prioritized to
maximize their own prosperity over that of the
shareholders. While the interest conflict between the shareholders and creditors arises as
the result of the fact that the obligation owners
generally earn steady income regardless of the
good performance of the company, whereas
the shareholders will earn larger income along
with the better performance of the company.
Asymmetric information results in manager of having better information on the company’s prospect than the investors do. Berk &

DeMarzo (2011) declared that asymmetric
information occurs when managers have better
information from the investors. Creditors are
outsider party that suffers from the loss of information equal to that obtained by the external shareholders. Bebczuk (2003) affirmed
asymmetric information in financial contract
every time the loan giver does not have the
necessary information for identifying the
creditor’s capability in paying off its debt.
Pecking order theory is one of theories on
funding decision based on asymmetric information. Myers (1984) argued that the decision
of funding based on pecking order theory,
which was stated in 1961, follows the sequence of funding; 1) a company prefers internal-resource funding; 2) a company adjusts
the target of dividend payment to the investment opportunity; 3) dividend policy is sticky,
profitability fluctuation and investment opportunity gives impact on larger or smaller
internal cash flow than investment expenditure; 4) if external fund is required, a company
prefers debt-resource funding as it is regarded
safer than publicizing new equity as the last
option to meet the need of investment.
Share and obligation publication is done
when a company needs external funding. With

the availability of asymmetric information can
help market to detect the prospect of a com-

134

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

pany through managerial behavior in making
financial decision. A company with poor prospect is inclined to fund the investment by
issuing shares in order to share the loss with
new investors. The new share publication is
interpreted as bad news that results in the
company value reflected by the decreasing
value of share price. While a company with
good prospect is prone to avoiding share sale
and attempts additional capital using other
efforts, including the use of debt over the target of normal capital structure. Ghosh, et al.
(2008) stated that managers of good-prospect
Company would give signals to the investors
by issuing debt instead of self-capital. The use

of debt over the target of normal capital
structure will enlarge flat-interest burden and
bring about the company’s financial distress.
The use of interest-loaded debt has advantage
and weakness. Ross, et al. (2010) declared that
in the financial perspective, the major differences between debt and self-capital are: 1)
debt does not belong to company’s ownership,
creditor does not have any right to vote; 2)
debt interest payment is a business operational
cost that can reduce the burden of tax, dividend for the shareholders, and the company’s
tax; 3) an unpaid-off debt is the company’s
responsibility.
Interest conflict and asymmetric information influence a company’s financial policy.
The tendency of the management to make
policy that will maximize its own prosperity
rather than that of the shareholders requires
the shareholders to expend cost for controlling
management activity to make it consistent
with the contract agreement among the shareholders, managers, and creditors. Agency cost
is cost expended for overcoming agency

problem. Ghosh, et al. (2008) perceived not
only does the interaction among the shareholders and the managers cause agency cost,
but also the interaction among the loan givers
and the creditors cause agency cost. This
agency cost will be high if the shareholders
always control every management’s action. It

January

will be low if the management is less motivated to elevate its own prosperity.
A company minimizes the costs that result
from agency problem and asymmetric information by optimizing insider ownership and
other financial policies like dividend policy,
debt policy, and investment decision. Optimization of insider ownership and financial policies make business risk more controllable.
Insider ownership and financial policies are
helpful in overcoming asymmetric information
between managers and external investors
(Leland & Pyle, 1977; Ross, 1977). Jensen et
al. (1992) stated that agency and signaling
theory indicates that debt, dividend, and

insider ownership is not only related to special
attributes of the similar companies, but also
directly inter-relevant to each other. Chen et
al. (1999) stated fact that managerial ownership, risk taking, debt policy, and dividend
policy are integral part of the company’s decision-making process in the agency framework.
The ownership of shares by management
(insider ownership) is a policy to reduce interest conflict between the shareholders and the
managers. The shareholders control the company by selecting a group of people who have
authority to make decision in the company.
Hua (2006) revealed the opinion of Agrawal &
Mandelker (1987), Lewellen, et al. (1985) that
insider shareholdings help overcome agency
problem between the managers and the
shareholders upon doing supervision. Insider
ownership is reflected from the percentage of
the company’s shares owned by directors and
commissioners. Directors and commissioners
will allocate a great amount of their wealth for
the company. Domash (2010) affirmed that insider ownership is usually stated by the percentage of flowing shares held by insiders.
Insider ownership gives advantage in relevance with the controlling potentials of managers who have large interest toward the company. The largest advantage will manifest if

asymmetric information between insiders and
outsiders reaches its highest level. However,

2013

Erkaningrum

there will only be little advantage obtained
from this form of insider ownership, if outsiders know something about the company and
the managerial effort as much as that known
by insiders. Insider ownership makes management able to manage and make financial
policies better, so that business risk can be
more controllable.
Dividend policy is a policy that can be
used to reduce agency problem. Baker (2009)
stated that dividend policy could play an
important role in reducing agency problem
between the managers and the external shareholders. The company makes dividend policy
that can create equality among the current
dividends and growth in the future so that it

can maximize the share price. The increasing
of the share price means promoting the shareholders’ prosperity.
Even though dividend policy can enhance
the prosperity of the shareholders, the high
payment of dividend will give impact on the
limited fund available for investors. Besley &
Brigham (2012b) stated that residual dividend
policy is a policy in which the paid dividend
equals the actual profit subtracted to the profit
restrained for funding the company’s capital
budget optimally. The company is exposed to
making decision on distributing profit in the
form of dividend or holding it back to be
invested back to the company. The company’s
decision to invest will enhance the company’s
value that is reflected from the share price.
The increase of share price will maximize the
shareholder’s prosperity.
Debt policy enables creditor to obtain
more information on the company’s prospect.
The shareholders make into good use of debt
policy to share the cost of supervision with the
obligation owners/holders in as such that management is encouraged to act disciplinarily to
avoid bankruptcy. Jensen (1986) argued that
debt can also function to reduce agency cost
concerning with free cash flow. Liquidation or
reorganization will be the consequences of the
company’s bankruptcy if creditors claim for

135

the company’s asset as the result of its inability to pay off its debt. Therefore, one of the
debt publication costs is the possibility of
financial failure. Ghosh, et al. (2008) stated
that a company would suffer bankruptcy, as it
is not able to fulfill its obligation to the creditors, which are mostly due to the business and
financial risks. Moyer, et al. (2012) stated that
business risk is the variability or uncertainty of
the company’s operational income. Ehrhardt &
Brigham (2011) stated that financial risk is
additional risk for the common shareholders
because of the decision of debt funding. The
use of debt will enhance the risk of the shareholders. The shareholders’ risk will increase if
the company’s business is not in well condition, the operational income will be low and
insufficient to cover the interest so that the
owner’s wealth will reduce even in an extreme
condition the company can experience bankruptcy. This explanation above shows the
interaction of insider ownership, dividend
policy, debt policy, investment decision, and
business risk.
HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT
1. The influential factors towards insider
ownership.
Influential factors towards insider ownership are empirically examined using seven
determinants, i.e. dividend, debt, investment,
business risk, profitability, sales growth, and
size. A company with high payment of dividend is prone to making the share ownership
by management become high, because of the
high level of dividend payment, as the high
level of dividend payment, will encourage
management to own the company’s shares.
The shareholders expect larger dividend at
present and in the future than that of the previous years. The increase of dividend payment
will likely increase the share price. The increase of the share price will likely increase
the shareholders’ prosperity. Omran & Pointon
(2004) found out that dividend determined the

136

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

share price that was actively marketed in
Egypt Stock Exchange.
The use of large debt tends to make the
level of share ownership by management low,
because the higher debt, the higher risk the
shareholders bear. The shareholders’ wealth
reduces when the company undergoes financial distress to fulfill its obligations, even in an
extreme condition, it will suffer bankruptcy.
Berk & DeMarzo (2011) stated that the use of
debt increases the risk of the shareholders,
even upon the company’s never-going-bankrupt condition. The liquidation cost leads to
negative correlation between debt and insider
ownership (Friend & Hashrouck, 1987; Friend
& Lang, 1988).
The number of investment opportunity
gives positive signal about the company’s
prospect and growth in the future, so it will
enhance the value of the company reflected
from the price share. Management is encouraged to own the company’s shares if the value
of the company increases. Eckbo (2008) put
forward the opinion of Modigliani & Miller
(1961) that investment policy determines the
value of the company and payment is a residue
between income and investment.
A company with high business risk is inclined to make the level of shares ownership
by management low, as management is prone
to restrict itself to be the owner of the company upon knowing that the company faces
high business risk. Alice, et al. (2009) affirmed that when a company uses debt or
financial leverage, business and finance risk is
borne on the shareholders.
A company that can produce high earnings will encourage management to own the
company’s share, because the high profit will
elevate dividend distributed to the shareholders and enhance the value of the company reflected from the share price. Barnes (2009)
stated that the business value is determined by
profitability, or to be more exact, the expected
profitability in the future.

January

Sales growth reflects one of the measurements for the level of success or realization of
the company’s past growth and becomes the
measuring rod for its future growth. A company with high sales growth is inclined to encourage management to hold the company’s
shares, as the future high growth will increase
the value of the company. Meier, et al. (2005)
stated that the steps of increasing the company’s value over the level of sale growth and
common profit become important matter.
Large-size company reflects the company’s past performance and becomes the indicator the company’s performance in the
future. The development of the company’s
performance from time to time will encourage
management to hold the company’s share because the amount of earnings that will be
received by the company in the future. Gallagher & Andrew (2007) exposed that the size is
expected to give cash flows in the future; the
amount of cash inflows in the future will
increase the share price. The hypothetical formula based on the above explanation and
research outcome is:
H1a = Dividend has positive influence on
insider ownership
H1b = Debt has negative influence on insiders
ownership
H1c = Investment has positive influence on
insider ownership
H1d = Business risk has negative influence on
insider ownership
H1e = Profitability has positive influence on
insider ownership
H1f = Sales growth has positive influence on
insider ownership
H1g = Size has positive influence on insider
ownership
2. The influential factors towards dividend
The influential factors towards dividend is
examined empirically using seven determinant, namely, insider ownership, debt, invest-

2013

Erkaningrum

ment, business risk, profitability, sales growth,
and variability of earnings. A company with
high insider ownership is prone to paying high
dividend, as the high payment of dividend will
push conflict between managers and the
shareholders. Bose (2010) stated that if management is strong enough to control the company (due to the substantial shares ownership),
it will have high dividend payout ratio.
A company with good prospect is inclined
to use debt as alternative to meet the need of
dividend payment in short term, if the company does not have any internal funding to
meet the necessity of fund. However, if a
company’s prospect is poor, it will create continuous use of debt, consequently it will overcome problem by adjusting dividend payout
ratio to the new earning level. Ehrhardt &
Brigham (2011) stated that the available cash
to be distributed to the shareholders depends
on the profitability, investment, and debt. Adedeji (1998) found out that financial leverage
has positive influence on dividend payout ratio.
A company with investment opportunity is
inclined to pay low dividend, in order to increase the proportion of internal equity that is
used for funding investment. Besley & Brigham (2012a) stated that dividend policy is
much influenced by the investment opportunity and the availability of fund used to finance new investment. Investment has negative influence on dividend (Jensen, 1986;
Jensen, et al., 1992; Adedeji, 1998; Chay,
2005).
A company with high business risk is
prone to paying low dividend, as the high
business risk makes the uncertainty of profitability level at present and in the future. The
uncertainty of profitability results in the limited fund available to pay dividend. Baker
(2009) stated that a company with high risk is
encouraged to decrease the dividend payout
ratio. Jensen, et al. (1992) found out that business risk has negative influence on dividend.

137

A company that produces high earnings is
inclined to paying high dividend, as the higher
profitability makes the larger fund available to
pay dividend. Bose (2010) stated that when
earnings rise, dividend would also rise if the
company can maintain the new level in the
future. Profitability has positive influence on
dividend (Jensen, et al., 1992).
A company with high sales growth is inclined to limit the payment of dividend in order to enhance the proportion of internal
equity, which is used to elevate its growth.
Barclay, et al. (1999) stated that a company
with high growth requires more fund, as there
are more opportunities for investment so that it
tends to pay lower dividend than a company
with low growth does. Jensen, et al., (1992)
found out that growth has negative influence
on dividend.
A company with stable earnings level can
maintain the payment of dividend without
having to risk cutting dividend in the future, as
the company can predict the future earnings
with higher level of accuracy. Chandra (2008)
stated that dividend policy fluctuates along
with earnings, resulting in the direct transmission of variability of earnings with dividend.
The hypothetical formula, based on the above
explanation and research outcome is:
H2a = Insider ownership has positive influence on dividend
H2b = Debt has positive influence on dividend
H2c = Investment has negative influence on
dividend
H2d = Business risk has negative influence on
dividend
H2e = Profitability has positive influence on
dividend
H2f = Sales growth has negative influence on
dividend
H2g = Variability of earnings has negative
influence on dividend

138

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

3. The influential factors towards debt.
The influential factors toward debt are
examined empirically using seven determinants, namely, insider ownership, dividend,
investment, business risk, profitability, variability of earnings, and structure of assets. A
company with high level of insider ownership
is prone to using low debt to anticipate the
possibility of financial distress resulting from
the use of debt. The shareholders’ risks rise,
when the company does not have adequate
capacity to close interest, so that the shareholders’ wealth reduces even in an extreme
condition, the company can go bankrupt. Insider ownership has negative influence on the
financial policy (Friend & Hasbrouck, 1987;
Friend & Lang, 1988; Jensen, et al., 1992).
A company that pays high dividend is inclined to use larger debt because the high
payment of dividend will increase the need of
cash in the future and will result in the limited
retained earning that can be used to overcome
the need of fund. The limit of retained earning
encourages the use of larger debt. Banerjee
(2010) stated that the decision of funding in
turn, will influence and be influenced by dividend policy, for retained earnings used up for
internal funding shows the agreed dividend by
the shareholders. Dividend has positive influence on debt (Baskin, 1989; Adedeji, 1998).
A company with more opportunities for
investment is inclined to use larger debt if its
internal equity to finance investment does not
suffice. Baker & Martin (2011) stated that
Mackay (2003) found out the company’s
specific factor, like flexibility on production
and investment area has an important implication towards the company’s structure of
finance. Investment has positive correlation
with financial leverage (Baskin, 1989; Chang
& Rhee, 1990; Adedeji, 1998).
A company with high business risk tends
to use low debt, because the high business risk
makes the current and future level of profitability uncertain. The uncertainty of profit-

January

ability decreases the quantity of debt received
by the company. Besides, the large debt will
also enlarge the flat-interest burden and will
result in the company’s financial distress.
Ehrhardt & Brigham (2011) stated that a
company with high operating leverage, and
thus, meaning a larger business risk, will limit
the use of financial leverage.
A company with high level of profitability
is inclined to use low debt because the high
profitability result in the larger retained earning available as an internal resource to meet
the need of fund. Melicher & Norton (2011)
revealed that a more profitable company is
inclined to use smaller debt. Profitability has
negative correlation towards leverage (Baskin,
1989; Chang & Ree, 1990; Jensen, et al.,
1992; Allen, 1993; Pandey, 2001; Shumi,
2005; Hyesung, et al., 2006; Tran &
Neelakantan, 2006).
A company with high level of unstable
earnings has limitation to obtain loan because
of the distrust of the loan giver. The distrust
results from the uncertainty of the loan giver
about the company’s capability to reach the
expected profit in the future. Kent & Martin
(2011) revealed that high cash flow volatility
brings about the potential high cost of financial distress, and either trade-off theory or
pecking order theory predicts the negative
correlation between volatility and leverage.
A company with assets of high collateral
value can obtain larger loan as the company
can fulfill its obligations with those assets
upon facing bankruptcy. Galindo & Schiantarelli (2003) found out that the company size
and tangibility of assets are influential toward
long-term debt. Structure of assets has positive
correlation with leverage (Adedeji, 1998). The
formulation of hypothesis based the above
explanation and research outcome is:
H3a = Insider ownership has negative influence on debt
H3b = Dividend has positive influence on debt

2013

Erkaningrum

H3c = Investment has positive influence on
debt
H3d = Business risk has negative influence on
debt
H3e = Profitability has negative influence on
debt
H3f = Variability of earnings has negative
influence on debt
H3g = Structure of assets has negative influence on debt
4.

The influential factors towards investment.

The influential factors towards investment
are examined empirically using seven determinants, which are: insider ownership, dividend,
debt, business risk, profitability, sales growth
and Q ratio. A company with the high level of
insider ownership is inclined to put large investment, as the shareholder expect the increase of the share price resulting from positive signal on the company’s prospect in the
future that is arisen by the large investment the
company puts.
A company that pays high dividend tends
to have limitation in making investment, because the high payment of dividend causes the
limited retained earnings that can be used by
the company to put investment in the following period. Dividend has negative influence on
the investment in the following period
(Baskin, 1989; Allen, 1993; Adedeji, 1998). A
company with good prospect has tendency to
use debt to make good use of the investment
opportunities, if the company has limited internal fund. However, if the company’s prospect is not well, it will make the necessity of
fund last incessantly, so that the company
overcomes the necessity of fund with new
investment opportunity. Banerjee (2010)
stated that the investment decision in purchasing new project capital requires the decision of funding. Financial leverage has positive correlation with investment (Baskin,
1989; Allen, 1993; Tong & Green, 2005).

139

A company with high business risk is inclined to make low investment, because the
high business risk makes the uncertainty of the
profitability level at present and in the future.
The uncertainty of profitability will create the
limited internal fund available to make investment. Madura (2007) stated that when the
businesses owner judges the possibility of
investment in any business, he would consider
the potential return and risk of a kind of investment.
A company with high profitability has larger capability to collect investment fund,
because the high level of earnings produced
will result in the larger amount of internal fund
available for making investment. Profitability
has positive correlation with the investment
(Baskin, 1989; Tong & Green, 2005).
A company with high sales growth has
many opportunities to make investment, because sales growth reflects the realization of
the past investment and becomes the barometer of future investment. Fama (1974) observed that sales growth has positive influence
on the investment in America. Alice, et al.
(2009) put forward that the recent years tendencies for companies with high growth; either those of manufacturing company or other
companies from business sector, are promoting efficiency through the enhancement of
capital investment.
Q ratio variable, which is stated with price
to book value ratio, has positive influence on
investment. Q ratio has positive influence on
investment (Adedeji, 1998; Baskin, 1989). The
hypothetical formula, based on the above
explanation and research outcome is:
H4a = Insider ownership has positive influence on investment
H4b = Dividend has negative on investment
H4c = Debt has positive influence on investment
H4d = Business risk has negative influence on
investment

140

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

H4e = Profitability has positive influence on
investment
H4f = Sales growth has positive influence on
investment
H4g = Q ratio has positive influence on
investment
5. The influential factors towards business
risk.
The influential factors towards business
risk are examined empirically using seven
determinants, which are insider ownership,
dividend, debt, investment, liquidity, variability of earnings, and size. A company with high
level of insider ownership is inclined to control the company by making financial policy
that leads to low business risk, because the
low business risk is borne by the shareholders.
May (1995) found out the reversed causal correlation of managerial ownership towards
business risk.
A company with high payment of dividend tends to have high business risk, because
the high payment of dividend causes the limited retained earning that can be used by the
company to make investment in the subsequent period. The limited opportunities for the
company to make investment results in the
high business risk because of the incapability
of the company to produce profit due to the
low sales. Venkatesh (1989) found out the
dividend policy has influence on the risk.
The use of large debt will increase the
business risk, because the high use of debt will
increase the probability of the company of
going through financial distress, because the
high flat interest burden. The large interest
burden will cause the high business risk because the company’s operational activities
become disturbed. Kent & Martini (2011)
stated that the company’s capital structure is
determining directly the risk and cost of capital entirely.
A company that has many opportunities
for investment is inclined to have low business

January

risk, because the large opportunity for investment gives possibility for the company to produce high profit resulting from the high sale.
Harris & Mongiello (2006) stated that the
policy for operation, investment, funding and
dividend influence the business risk and financial risk and eventually systematic risk.
A company with high level of liquidity is
inclined to have low business risk, because the
high level of liquidity shows the capability of
the company in fulfilling its obligations that
will due. The high level of liquidity will cause
low business risk because of the absence of
obstacles for the company in doing the company’s operational activity. Khan (2002) stated
that the major risks come from inflation market, interest rate, business, liquidity, currency,
as well as specific risks.
A company with high level of unstable
earnings is inclined to have large business risk,
because the difficulty for the company to
predict future earnings causes the uncertainty
of the company in making investment. The
uncertainty of the company to make investment results in high business risk because the
process of selecting investment is not optimal.
Mayo (2012) stated the increase of variability
of business profit would enhance the company’s business risk.
A company with big size is prone to having low business risks, because the large size
of company reflects the effectiveness of the
company’s performance from time to time and
indicates the future performance of it. Zion &
Shalit (1975) declared that big-sized company
has lower risk than small company does. The
hypothetical formulation based on the above
explanation and research outcome is:
H5a = Insider ownership has negative influence on business risk
H5b = Dividend has positive influence on
business risk
H5c = Debt has positive influence on business
risk

2013

Erkaningrum

H5d = Investment has negative influence on
business risk
H5e = Liquidity has negative influence on
business risk
H5f = Variability of earnings has positive
influence on business risk
H5g = Size has negative influence on business
risk
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
a. Population and Sample
Anderson et al. (2011) stated that population is a group of elements of an interest in a
specific research. Population employed in this
research is manufacturing company that has
publicized a complete financial report at Indonesia Capital Market Directory since 2006
until 2010. The selection of manufacturing
company as its population is because the research will be more relevant if it is carried out
on the same types of industry (considering the
difference characteristics among industries)
and the amount of manufacturing industry
registered in Indonesia Stock Exchange.
The research sample collection is done
using method of purposive sampling. Sekaran
& Bougie (2010) stated that the research
sample collection using this purposive sampling method is a process of collecting samples referring to the type of special person who
can provide the wanted information either because they are the only ones that own the information or because the information is adjusted to the criteria established by the researcher. The criteria used is manufacturing
company with data about insider ownership,
dividend, debt, investment, business risk,
profitability, sales growth, size, variability of
earnings, structure of assets, Q ratio, and liquidity. Data pooling is carried out by adding
companies that can fulfill the research criteria
in five-year research period. Companies that
can fulfill the criteria are 137 companies.

141

b. Research Variables
This research hypothetical examination
employs variables that refer to the size of researches ever conducted. Variables of debt,
business risk, and profitability refer to the research size of Jensen at al. (1992). Variables
of dividend, investment, sales growth, size,
variability of earnings, structure of assets, Q
ratio, and liquidity refer to the research size of
Adedeji (1998).
= Insider Ownership is measured
with the percentage of the company’s shares owned by directors
and commissioners.
DIV
= Dividend is measured with dividend divided by earnings after tax
DE
= Debt is measured with ratio of
long-term debt to the book value of
total assets
INV
= Investment is measured with (total
assets t - total assets t-1) divided by
total assets t-1
BRISK = Business risk is measured with
standard deviation of the first difference in operating income divided
by total assets
INS

PRO

= Profitability is measured with ratio
of operating income to total assets

GRO

= Sales growth is measured with
(salest - salest-1) divided by sales t-1

SZ

= Size is measured with the natural
logarithm of total assets

VAR

= Variability of earnings is presented
with the standard deviation of (annual change in profit before interest
and tax divided by total assets)

STR

= Structure of assets is measured with
total net fixed assets divided by
market value of the firm

Q

= Q ratio is measured with price to
book value ratio

142
LIQ

c.

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business
= Liquidity is measured with current
assets minus stocks and divided by
current liabilities
Hypothetical Examination Model

This research hypothesis is examined using simultaneous equation model of three
stage least square (3 SLS). This equation
model is used because this simultaneous equation model of three stage least square (3 SLS)
is a method in which all equations in model
are made into account altogether and predicted
simultaneously by noticing the whole limitation at the equation system in the model.
The simultaneous equation model employed to observe reciprocal interactions
among variables of insider ownership, dividend, debt, investment, and business risk is:
INS

= ƒ (DIV, DE, INV, BRISK, PRO,
GRO, SZ)

DIV

= ƒ (INS, DE, INV, BRISK, PRO,
GRO, VAR)

DE

= ƒ (INS, DIV, INV, BRISK, PRO,
VAR, STR)

INV

= ƒ (INS, DIV, DE, BRISK, PRO,
GRO, Q)

BRISK = ƒ (INS, DIV, DE, INV, LIQ, VAR,
SZ)
THE OUTCOME OF DATA ANALYSIS
Table 1 indicates that investment, business
risk, and size has negative influence on insider
ownership, whereas dividend, debt, profitability and sales growth does not have any influence on insider ownership. Negative coefficient on investment variable shows that Indonesian shareholders prefer that dividends be
distributed to the shareholders in the form of
dividend than be retained in the company for
investment. Dividend is regarded to give certainty than investment. Negative coefficient
variable of size shows that small company

January

gives bigger authority and larger control by
the owner in the company. The owners of the
company take a larger position than those of
small company because it only requires far
smaller wealth to control several percentage of
the company. Size has negative influence on
insider ownership in line with the research of
Jensen, et al. (1992). Brigham & Daves (2012)
declared that in individual company,
partnership and small company, the owner of
the company also serves as the manager. This
does not prevail in big company, where it will
face serious problem if the shareholders acts
as managers. Dividend and debt do not have
any influence on insider ownership in line
with the research of Jensen, et al. (1992).
Therefore, proof that dividend, debt, profitability, and sales growth are significantly determinant toward insider ownership is never
found or there is no a plausible reason to believe that the company’s management is encouraged to own the company’s shares because of dividend, debt, profitability, and sales
growth.
Insider ownership, debt and business risk
have negative influence on dividend, whereas
investment, profitability, sales growth, and
variability of earnings do not have any influence on dividend. Negative coefficient of insider ownership variable is possibly caused by
the fact that the shareholders prefer to choose
the available fund for paying off debt rather
than receiving dividend. This explanation is
put forward in relevant with the outcome of
investment’s negative influence on insider
ownership and debt’s negative influence on
dividend. Profitability and variability of earnings do not have any influence on dividend
along the lines of the research of Adedeji
(1988). Investment, profitability, sales growth
and variability of earnings do not have any
influence on dividend, showing that dividend
is not determined by investment, profitability,
sales growth, and variability of earnings.

2013

Table 1. Outcome of Hypothetical Examination
Dependent Variable:

Dependent Variable:

Dependent Variable:

Dependent Variable:

Dependent Variable:

Insider Ownership

Dividend

Debt

Investment

Business Risk

Independent
Variable

Independent
Variable

Outcome

0.58865 Constant
(5.411)***

Dividend

-0.034028 Insider Ownership
(-1.324)

Debt

0.012862 Debt
(0.2099)

Investment

-0.11330 Investment
(-3.559)***

Business Risk

-0.20540 Business Risk
(-2.251)**

Profitability

0.025576 Profitability
(0.3106)

Sales Growth
Size
R2 = 0.1650

-0.0022155 Sales Growth
(-0.2009)
-0.018514 Variability of Earnings
(-4.681)***
R2 = 0.0419

0.39912 Constant
(7.776)***
-0.49017 Insider Ownership
(-1.838)*
-0.92220 Dividend
(-4.888)***
-0.13608 Investment
(-1.254)
-0.90516 Business Risk
(-2.851)***

Outcome

Independent
Variable

0.17385 Constant
(6.653)***
-0.14730 Insider Ownership
(-1.232)
-0,16910 Dividend
(-4.757)***
0.056387 Debt
(1.241)

Outcome

Independent
Variable

Outcome

0.12563 Constant
(2.814)***

0.48913
(4.978)***

-0.77363 Insider Ownership
(-3.726)***

-0.20998
(-2.836)***

-0.069924 Dividend
(-0.9981)

-0.050980
(-2.270)***

0.14788 Debt
(0.9583)

-0.054516
(-1.029)

-0.27320 Business Risk
(-1.984)**

-0.53078 Investment
(-2.342)**

-0.054942
(-2.115)**

0.047455 Profitability
(0.1719)

-0.22212 Profitability
(-1.887)*

0.66758 Profitability
(3.210)***

-0.00067032
(-0.9794)

0.027371 Variability of Earnings
(0.7568)

0.032232 Sales Growth
(0.1953)

0.093213 Variability of
(3.248)*** Earnings

-0.24302 Structure of Assets
(-0.6465)

0.041150 Q Ratio
(1.004)

R2 = 0.0455

R2 = 0.2120

-0.0072319 Size
(-0.6949)

0.44554
(5.032)***
-0.014631
(-4.139)***

R2 = 0.2775

143

Remark:
* = Sig. at level of prob. signif = 0.10
** = Sig. at level of prob. signif = 0.05
*** = Sig. at level of prob. signif = 0.01

Independent
Variable

Erkaningrum

Constant

Outcome

144

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

Dividend, business risk, and profitability
have negative influence on debt, whereas insider ownership, investment, variability of
earnings, and structure of assets do not have
any influence on debt. Negative coefficient of
dividend variable describes that a company
with high dividend is prone to being selective
in judging investment, so that it results in the
low debt that the company uses. Dividend has
negative influence on debt (Jensen, et al.,
1992; Allen, 1993). Variability of earnings
does not have any influence on debt corresponding to the research of Adedeji (1998).
Insider ownership, investment, variability of
earnings, and structure of assets do not have
any influence on debt, showing that no proof
is found to show that insider ownership, investment, variability of earnings, and structure
of assets do not significantly determine debt.
Insider ownership and business risk have
negative influence on investment, profitability,
and sales growth have positive influence on
investment, whereas dividend, debt, and Q
ratio do not have any influence on investment.
Negative coefficient of insider ownership
variable indicates that Indonesian shareholders
prefer to receive dividend rather than making
investment in compliance with the research by
Adedeji (1998). Dividend, debt, and Q ratio do
not have any influence on investment,

January

showing that no proof is found to show that
dividend, debt, and Q ratio are importantly
determining investments.
Insider ownership, dividend, investment
and size have negative influence on business
risk, variability of earnings have positive influence on business risk, whereas debt and
liquidity do not have any influence on business risk. Dividend has negative influence on
business risk, indicating that companies in
Indonesia are careful in making investment.
Debt and liquidity do not have any influence
on business risk, showing that debt and liquidity do not importantly determine business risk.
Picture 1 shows the interactions among
variables of insider ownership, dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision and business risk. The analysis outcome on the equation of insider ownership, dividend, debt, investment and business risk indicate that: 1)
reciprocal correlation is found among insider
ownership, investment and business risk; 2)
reciprocal correlation is found between dividend and debt; 3) reciprocal correlation is
found between dividend and business risk; 4)
insider ownership influences dividend; 5)
business risk influences debt.
Reciprocal correlation among insider
ownership, investment and business risk indi-

Insider Ownership

Business Risk

Dividend

Investment

Debt

Picture 1. The Research Outcome on the Interactions among Insider Ownership, Dividend
Policy, Debt Policy, Investment Decision, and Business Risk

2013

Erkaningrum

cates: 1) a company with high level of insider
ownership is inclined to apply alertness principles in making investment and controlling
the company by making financial policy that
leads to a low business risk; 2) a company that
makes large investment will make business
risk low but the large investment even will
make management reluctant to own the company’s shares; 3) a company with high business risk will result in the management reluctant to own the company’s shares and the low
investment that the company makes.
Reciprocal correlation between dividend
and debt indicates the large debt the company
uses for making the reduction of dividend distributed to the shareholders, contrary to that,
the large dividend distributed to the shareholders makes the low debt that the company
uses because of the company’s alertness in
making investment. Reciprocal correlation
between dividend and business risk indicates
that a company with high business risk will
give low dividend because of the limited fund
available for the payment of dividend, and on
the other hand, the company that gives high
dividend will make business risk low.
Seeing the result obtained and comparing
the proposed hypotheses, we can get hold of
outcome, showing that the proven hypotheses
are hypotheses of H1d, H2d, H3d, H3e, H4d, H4e,
H4f, H5a, H5d, H5f, and H5g. R2 value or determination coefficient for equation of insider
ownership is 0, 1650, equation of dividend is
0, 0419, equation of debt is 0, 0455, equation
of investment is 0, 2120, equation of business
risk is 0, 2775. R2 or determination coefficient
shows the variability of variables that can be
clarified by the independent variables in such
equations.
CONCLUSION, MANAGERIAL
IMPLICATION, AND RESEARCH
SHORTCOMINGS
1.

Conclusion

The analysis outcome of insider ownership equation indicates that investment, busi-

145

ness risk, and size have significant, negative
influence on insider ownership. Insider ownership, debt, and business risk gives significant
negative influence on dividend as can be seen
from the analysis outcome of dividend
equation. The significant, negative influence
of dividend, business risk and profitability
towards debt can be seen from the analysis
outcome of debt equation. The analysis outcome of investment equation indicates that
insider ownership and business risk have significant, negative influence on investment,
whereas profitability and sales growth have
significant, positive influence on investment.
The analysis outcome of business risk equation shows that insider ownership, dividend,
investment and size have significant, negative
influence on business risk, whereas variability
of earnings has significant, positive influence
on business risk.
The interactions among insider ownership,
dividend policy, debt policy, investment decision and business risk are; reciprocal correlation is found among insider ownership, investment and business risk; 2) reciprocal correlation is found between dividend and debt;
3) reciprocal correlation is found between
dividend and business risk; 4) insider ownership influences dividend; 5) business risk influences debt.
2.

Managerial Implication

The description of the analysis outcome
and the managerial implication of the equation
of insider ownership, dividend, debt, investment, and business risk indicate that:
a. The shareholders in Indonesia prefer to
allocate the obtained profit in the form of
dividend rather than retaining profit for
making investment, because dividend is
considered to give more certainty than investment. This allocation requires the
management to notice, as the large profit
distributed to the shareholder will bring
about the limited internal fund, which can
be used for investment, consequently the

146

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business

company will find it hard to develop in the
future.
b. The companies in Indonesia are relatively
not brave to bear risk, as can be seen from
1) the financial policy made leads to low
business risk; 2) they are selective in
making investment, so that investment is
only made if the company has made successful investment in the past and has high
certainty to make future investment; 3) the
company prefers internal resource to
finance investment. Alertness principles
should necessarily be noticed by management, because if the company is very alert
and selective in making investment, it will
result in the incapability of the company to
make good use of investment opportunities.
3. Research Shortcomings
This research has some shortcomings,
which can be the future research orientation.
Such shortcomings are:
a. The utilization of manufacturing companies registered in Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2006 until 2010 as sampling
data in this research cannot reflect the entire condition of companies in Indonesia.
The use of samples in each industry is
good in order to obtain outcome that can
be compared for each industry.
b. Insider ownership used in this research is
insider ownership data, which is acquired
directly from Indonesia Capital Market
Directory. The future research should
utilize insider ownership data, which is indirectly acquired in order to produce outcomes that can be compared to the current
existing pr